| scholarly article | Q13442814 |
| P356 | DOI | 10.1038/NNANO.2009.265 |
| P698 | PubMed publication ID | 19893527 |
| P50 | author | Terre Satterfield | Q102583452 |
| P2093 | author name string | Joseph Conti | |
| Milind Kandlikar | |||
| Barbara Herr Harthorn | |||
| Christian E H Beaudrie | |||
| P2860 | cites work | Toxic potential of materials at the nanolevel | Q28295314 |
| Risk Perception and Affect | Q30053753 | ||
| Risk as feelings | Q33943609 | ||
| Risk perception and communication | Q40821793 | ||
| Perceived risks and perceived benefits of different nanotechnology foods and nanotechnology food packaging | Q44224298 | ||
| Religious beliefs and public attitudes toward nanotechnology in Europe and the United States | Q44665394 | ||
| Nanotechnology and society. New insights into public perceptions | Q45349816 | ||
| Meta-analysis: recent developments in quantitative methods for literature reviews. | Q45939380 | ||
| What drives public acceptance of nanotechnology? | Q47432805 | ||
| Cultural cognition of the risks and benefits of nanotechnology | Q47620180 | ||
| Gender, race, and perception of environmental health risks | Q47649724 | ||
| On the relative independence of thinking biases and cognitive ability | Q47701260 | ||
| An emotion-based model of risk perception and stigma susceptibility: cognitive appraisals of emotion, affective reactivity, worldviews, and risk perceptions in the generation of technological stigma. | Q50985914 | ||
| Public perceptions of the potential hazards associated with food production and food consumption: an empirical study. | Q51131125 | ||
| The influence of trust and perceptions of risks and benefits on the acceptance of gene technology. | Q52077314 | ||
| Powerline frequency electric and magnetic fields: a pilot study of risk perception. | Q52669346 | ||
| Perceived risk, real risk: social science and the art of probabilistic risk assessment. | Q52869534 | ||
| Public concerns in the United Kingdom about general and specific applications of genetic engineering: risk, benefit, and ethics. | Q53606168 | ||
| The Public and Nanotechnology: How Citizens Make Sense of Emerging Technologies | Q54201495 | ||
| Perception of risk | Q56602912 | ||
| Imagining nanotechnology: cultural support for technological innovation in Europe and the United States | Q57422316 | ||
| Scientists worry about some risks more than the public | Q57751576 | ||
| Public Attitudes toward Emerging Technologies | Q57751593 | ||
| Exploring the Dimensionality of Trust in Risk Regulation | Q58254115 | ||
| Nanotechnology and the need for risk governance | Q58311959 | ||
| Laypeople's and Experts' Perception of Nanotechnology Hazards | Q58391233 | ||
| Science knowledge and attitudes across cultures: a meta-analysis | Q59442922 | ||
| Meta-analysis of survey data: application to health services research | Q59745761 | ||
| A Psychological Study of the Inverse Relationship Between Perceived Risk and Perceived Benefit | Q64118034 | ||
| Deliberating the risks of nanotechnologies for energy and health applications in the United States and United Kingdom | Q73165864 | ||
| Perception of hazards: the role of social trust and knowledge | Q73280033 | ||
| Discrimination, vulnerability, and justice in the face of risk | Q79791793 | ||
| P433 | issue | 11 | |
| P407 | language of work or name | English | Q1860 |
| P921 | main subject | nanotechnology | Q11468 |
| P304 | page(s) | 752-758 | |
| P577 | publication date | 2009-09-20 | |
| P1433 | published in | Nature Nanotechnology | Q920399 |
| P1476 | title | Anticipating the perceived risk of nanotechnologies | |
| P478 | volume | 4 |
| Q56896506 | A longitudinal study of newspaper and wire service coverage of nanotechnology risks |
| Q57438148 | Altruism and skepticism in public attitudes toward food nanotechnologies |
| Q53411756 | Applications of nanotechnology in food packaging and food safety: barrier materials, antimicrobials and sensors. |
| Q39043604 | Are Australians concerned about nanoparticles? A comparative analysis with established and emerging environmental health issues. |
| Q90788151 | Are assumptions of consumer views impeding nano-based water treatment technologies? |
| Q38097389 | Assessing nanoparticle risk poses prodigious challenges. |
| Q58391022 | Bridgework ahead! Innovation ecosystems vis-à-vis responsible innovation |
| Q53051509 | Changes in the influence of affect and cognition over time on consumer attitude formation toward nanotechnology: A longitudinal survey study. |
| Q30221574 | Communicating science in social settings |
| Q28385147 | Comparative analysis of nanotechnology awareness in consumers and experts in South Korea |
| Q57435384 | Comparing nanoparticle risk perceptions to other known EHS risks |
| Q46133522 | Corporate social responsibility for nanotechnology oversight. |
| Q57751509 | Coverage of emerging technologies: A comparison between print and online media |
| Q35198467 | Current research on public perceptions of nanotechnology |
| Q36889969 | Effects of Metal Nanoparticles on Methane Production from Waste-Activated Sludge and Microorganism Community Shift in Anaerobic Granular Sludge |
| Q35952635 | Ethics, Risk and Benefits Associated with Different Applications of Nanotechnology: a Comparison of Expert and Consumer Perceptions of Drivers of Societal Acceptance |
| Q34368571 | Exploring early public responses to geoengineering |
| Q30520416 | Factors influencing societal response of nanotechnology: an expert stakeholder analysis |
| Q46408633 | Fairness and nanotechnology concern |
| Q38968182 | Foresight Study on the Risk Governance of New Technologies: The Case of Nanotechnology |
| Q38070327 | Graphene oxide nanoribbons (GNO), reduced graphene nanoribbons (GNR), and multi-layers of oxidized graphene functionalized with ionic liquids (GO-IL) for assembly of miniaturized electrochemical devices. |
| Q57425884 | Hungry for Information: Public Attitudes Toward Food Nanotechnology and Labeling |
| Q38413476 | Implementation of a multidisciplinary approach to solve complex nano EHS problems by the UC Center for the Environmental Implications of Nanotechnology |
| Q57751482 | Inequalities in Scientific Understanding |
| Q38863784 | International Implications of Labeling Foods Containing Engineered Nanomaterials |
| Q46662628 | Labeling of nanotechnology consumer products can influence risk and benefit perceptions |
| Q34332989 | Making sense of policy choices: understanding the roles of value predispositions, mass media, and cognitive processing in public attitudes toward nanotechnology. |
| Q57751432 | Mapping the Landscape of Public Attitudes on Synthetic Biology |
| Q28384103 | Nanomedicine: promises and challenges for the future of public health |
| Q57751433 | Nanoscientists and political involvement: Which characteristics make scientists more likely to support engagement in political debates? |
| Q84866871 | Nanotechnology and society: the evolution of risk perceptions |
| Q30392539 | Nanotechnology risk communication past and prologue |
| Q39686838 | Nanotechnology risk perceptions and communication: emerging technologies, emerging challenges |
| Q51901640 | Nanotechnology, risk, and oversight: learning lessons from related emerging technologies. |
| Q46838048 | Nanotechnology: Armed resistance |
| Q45283999 | Pathways to support genetically modified (GM) foods in South Korea: Deliberate reasoning, information shortcuts, and the role of formal education |
| Q56669358 | People-Centered and Ecosystem-Based Knowledge Co-Production to Promote Proactive Biodiversity Conservation and Sustainable Development in Namibia |
| Q64243654 | Perceived Risk of Genetically Modified Foods Among Residents in Xi'an, China: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach |
| Q35562442 | Perceptions of risk from nanotechnologies and trust in stakeholders: a cross sectional study of public, academic, government and business attitudes |
| Q35677184 | Public optimism towards nanomedicine |
| Q26822431 | Recommendations for nanomedicine human subjects research oversight: an evolutionary approach for an emerging field |
| Q39035015 | Scientists' Ethical Obligations and Social Responsibility for Nanotechnology Research |
| Q57751535 | Stimulating Upstream Engagement: An Experimental Study of Nanotechnology Information Seeking |
| Q57751502 | The Current Status and Future Direction of Nanotechnology Regulations: A View from Nano-scientists |
| Q38593885 | The Epistemic Contract: Fostering an Appropriate Level of Public Trust in Experts |
| Q48049087 | The Inverse Relation Between Risks and Benefits: The Role of Affect and Expertise. |
| Q28748232 | The changing information environment for nanotechnology: online audiences and content |
| Q82253613 | The communication challenges presented by nanofoods |
| Q47820930 | The impact of accident attention, ideology, and environmentalism on American attitudes toward nuclear energy |
| Q39123699 | The perception of nanotechnology and nanomedicine: a worldwide social media study |
| Q57751495 | The “Nasty Effect:” Online Incivility and Risk Perceptions of Emerging Technologies |
| Q34779035 | Trust in Nanotechnology? On Trust as Analytical Tool in Social Research on Emerging Technologies |
| Q38708415 | Using perceptions as evidence to improve conservation and environmental management. |
| Q44211710 | Vulnerability and social justice as factors in emergent U.S. nanotechnology risk perceptions |
Search more.